1999 (3) TMI 214

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....abin) under sub-heading 7308.90, as against the claim of the appellants for classification of the said items under Heading 8479.00. The classification list pertaining to the years 1987-88 and 1988-89. 2.  The appellants claimed that the items are to be falling under the heading description machines, mechanical appliances having individual functions not specified or included elsewhere in that Chapter. The learned advocate points out that there is a basic error in the impugned order, inasmuch as that the Commissioner (Appeals) has raised the proof of burden of classification on the assessee and the claim placed by them in terms of the items sketch, blue print and photograph etc. to be claimed that the fixtures manufactured by them wou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se devices which enable the components to be assembled and welded together to form a body. These are designed to suit a particular type of body. They are any way machinery enabling production of end product. These fixtures are adjustable manually to suit operators convenience for the purposes of welding. Such fixtures, with the use of clamps and such other similar items, enable the operator to hold the components in place and allow him to weld them into position. He submits that they are not articles of iron and steel or classifiable under sub-heading 7308.90, as the items in question have a specific individual functions, inasmuch as that the individual functions of these fixtures are to enable the operator to assemble the components and we....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ehicle parts. The claim of the appellants to treat it as motor vehicle body and in alternative it was not considered including the plea of the items as goods. There is a basic error in the Commissioner's order inasmuch as that the Commissioner has placed the burden of marketability of the items on the appellants and also the aspect pertaining to classification. Which is now well settled that the burden of classification and to show that the item is marketable and or goods is solely on the revenue and in this case, the Commissioner has laid the burden on the appellants to discharge the same. This is against the well settled law. Further, the appellants had produced evidence and the said evidence has not been considered by both the lower auth....